Assuming in both situations you are top of the league. I would prefer to go unbeaten as it has a nice aura/sound to it
Makes no sense! You can go unbeaten in the league and finish on 38 points so to speak. Maximum points is of course way better, that’s the way you win the league
Maximum points.
The choice is literally "win the league unbeaten", so why should we assume we get 38 draws?
Of course it's the unbeaten league title, even I am excited if Barcelona manage to pull it off.
Points. We beat everyone in the league twice apart from one team who we lose to one time (probably later in the season when we've wrapped the title up and are looking towards big CL/FA Cup games)? Or we can draw to potentially many teams but not lose and we get to call ourselves Invincibles II? The former makes for a much better and more enjoyable season as far as I'm concerned.
Last edited:
Well, that's better than Arsenal's so called invincibles, who lost to half of Europe.
If both cases mean you win the league, I’d rather have the most wins and points (option 2). All teams lose eventually - it’s a nice narrative but not as impressive as people think.
Arsenal’s invincible only won 26 matches in the league, which is below average for title winners FYI.
City on the other hand have only dropped points 6 times this season which I find more impressive.
Arsenal’s invincible only won 26 matches in the league, which is below average for title winners FYI.
City on the other hand have only dropped points 6 times this season which I find more impressive.
Points
Arsenal’s run was impressive, but they had a crap load of draws, which are almost like a loss in my book.
Arsenal’s run was impressive, but they had a crap load of draws, which are almost like a loss in my book.
Obviously more points is better as thats the whole point of a league competition. I think going undefeated is overrated, you could go undefeated and only accumulate 80+ points and not even win the league. You could have 38 draws remain unbeaten but get relegated highly unlikely i know but possible, which is why i've never put too much stock into going unbeaten over 38 games.
Unbeaten. We would add a gold trophy to our collection.
No one remembers the Arsenal draws when you mention their season. It's just recognized as the ''invincible''. Unless you're nitpicking, of course.
No one remembers the Arsenal draws when you mention their season. It's just recognized as the ''invincible''. Unless you're nitpicking, of course.
Considering Uniteds current situation and playstyle and the shite we've been through for the past seasons I'm pretty sure most on here would prefer maximum points. Rather watch us win lots and lose a few than draw every now and then.
Edit: just saw there was a poll, lol. Must say I'm surprised, gotta read through all the reasoning now
Edit: just saw there was a poll, lol. Must say I'm surprised, gotta read through all the reasoning now
Last time a team went unbeaten in La Liga was in 1932 when there were only 10 teams in the division. It's a huge achievement, especially in a league with Real Madrid, Atletico, Sevilla etc.
Barca aren't exactly scrapping by with 70 points or something anway. If they win the remaining games they will be unbeaten with 96 points. Rather unbeaten with 96 points than winning with 100 points but getting 0-5ed by your rivals for example.
Barca aren't exactly scrapping by with 70 points or something anway. If they win the remaining games they will be unbeaten with 96 points. Rather unbeaten with 96 points than winning with 100 points but getting 0-5ed by your rivals for example.
I suppose it depends on how many draws you rack up during the undefeated season. You need to win 32 games minimum to hit 100 points with a loss so I think I'd go with that - going undefeated sounds nice but the football on show would surely be of a higher standard if you only dropped points in 6 games, as opposed to drawing 12 as the Arsenal invincibles side did.
Last edited:
If it's a choice between the highest ever accumulated points vs unbeaten then the former. Otherwise unbeaten.
Might be true. I do find that Arsenal supporters themselves remember the 1998 and 2002 sides more fondly though, which says something.
The unbeaten achievement by Barca is good but for me it's not great for the simple reason that this Barca team is overshadowed by two Barca sides of the last 10 years - the 09-11 team and the 14/15 treble winning team. They've done well domestically but they've been shown up in Europe like 3 seasons in a row now.
I prefer winning the league in the last second of the last game, at goal difference. THat's a title win, not the one where you finish 20 points ahead of the 2nd spot.
How can you be invincible if you drew 12 times and got knocked out of all Cup competitions in that season??
Would it be that impressive if you won 8 games and drew 30? I would really love a mid-table team to achieve that just to highlight how dumb the Invincibles label really is.
Would it be that impressive if you won 8 games and drew 30? I would really love a mid-table team to achieve that just to highlight how dumb the Invincibles label really is.
And that's just BS by the way. Any club would take an emphatic title win any day of the week. Just imagine being able to rest key plays for the Cup finals at the end of the season. That would be only the only way to achieve the Quad, if any club was ever going to do it.
I agree with you, on a team level. For a team having such a big advantage is great.
For me, as a fan, I want to see some feking action during the season, some upsets, some disappointments and then, in the last game, a title win.
Just to be a nitpick, maximum points involves winning every game and therefore is unbeaten - poorly worded thread title. 
A new points record for me. The whole point of the competition when you start out is to finish as high as possible. In general you do that by getting as many points as you can. Alright, if you're winning the league either way it doesn't matter so much that you get as many as you can, but still it's generally what you're aiming for.
Also, well it's alright being the second or third team to go unbeaten but if you get the most points ever then you've doen what no team has ever done before.
Edit: Apart from when United played them of course and that 0-0 (another draw) when Ruud missed the penalty.
A new points record for me. The whole point of the competition when you start out is to finish as high as possible. In general you do that by getting as many points as you can. Alright, if you're winning the league either way it doesn't matter so much that you get as many as you can, but still it's generally what you're aiming for.
Also, well it's alright being the second or third team to go unbeaten but if you get the most points ever then you've doen what no team has ever done before.
The only match I remember at all from Arsenal that season is a draw and Pires diving to get a penalty against Portsmouth.
Edit: Apart from when United played them of course and that 0-0 (another draw) when Ruud missed the penalty.
Last edited:
Yeah sure, but we could still get that buzz from the Cup finals. Remember that '99 season when everything was just falling for us. After that epic semi with Arsenal, it was just going to be our year. It surely has to be more exciting getting the league early then going for the Quad?
I’d go points personally, hitting 100 points makes other teams aware that they’ll have to do something pretty special to catch you up should your performance level stay the same.
That said, I agree with what another poster said and losing a game takes all the pressure off you in terms of trying to stay unbeaten. Every team wants to be that one team to beat you, until it happens, and then you can get back to winning without as much focus on it.
Both would be impressive.
That said, I agree with what another poster said and losing a game takes all the pressure off you in terms of trying to stay unbeaten. Every team wants to be that one team to beat you, until it happens, and then you can get back to winning without as much focus on it.
Both would be impressive.
Are we talking about all leagues or only 38 games leagues?
In a vacuum, it depends. 37W1L trumps 30W8D, it's not even a question. 37W1L vs 35W3D...now that's a lot harder to decide
In the context of barcelona(which is what this thread really is about), the 100 points season was more impressive in terms of the sheer domination of that team, whereas this season there was a lot more luck involved in their results. Ultimately though both season are marred by ugly CL exits(and elimination at the hands of madrid in the copa in '13). The 12/13 side though was massively derailed by Tito's illness, bad luck with injuries and finishing the season on an empty tank
CL win beats either though
In the context of barcelona(which is what this thread really is about), the 100 points season was more impressive in terms of the sheer domination of that team, whereas this season there was a lot more luck involved in their results. Ultimately though both season are marred by ugly CL exits(and elimination at the hands of madrid in the copa in '13). The 12/13 side though was massively derailed by Tito's illness, bad luck with injuries and finishing the season on an empty tank
CL win beats either though
Unbeaten for sure, though both are impressive feats.
I'd definitely take having more points. Who cares about a bunch of draws? Chelsea 04-05 was more impressive than the Invincibles, for me.
From a rational point of view, 100+ points would be the obvious choice. Honestly, there is not even a debate since it is just a better result than less points with going unbeaten.
However, football's not always a rational thing. There are games which are more important due to rivalry. A considerable part of the sport is about prestige and romanticism. Invincible seasons make great stories and are much more prestigeous than 100+ point ones, you can see it in the poll. That's why I ultimately chose the unbeaten record but from a pragmatic point of view, it would be the wrong choice. I would prefer it because of the story to tell and everyone remembering it for ages but I wouldn't say it is a greater achievement. Just a more memorable one.
@Arbitrium What about a season in which your team doesn't win the league but remains unbeaten? I mean, if the current Barcelona played against one of these brillant league winning Madrid sides, this could've been the case.
However, football's not always a rational thing. There are games which are more important due to rivalry. A considerable part of the sport is about prestige and romanticism. Invincible seasons make great stories and are much more prestigeous than 100+ point ones, you can see it in the poll. That's why I ultimately chose the unbeaten record but from a pragmatic point of view, it would be the wrong choice. I would prefer it because of the story to tell and everyone remembering it for ages but I wouldn't say it is a greater achievement. Just a more memorable one.
@Arbitrium What about a season in which your team doesn't win the league but remains unbeaten? I mean, if the current Barcelona played against one of these brillant league winning Madrid sides, this could've been the case.
Surely most points.
Definitely most points, poll results are a surprise
Most points, obviously.
17th place and safety (with 18 defeats), or 18th place, unbeaten and relegated?
Unbeaten is not that great. It’s like saying two draws is superior to a win and a defeat.
17th place and safety (with 18 defeats), or 18th place, unbeaten and relegated?
Unbeaten is not that great. It’s like saying two draws is superior to a win and a defeat.
Yeah it kind of is but hey, at this given moment in time, I wouldn't really give a fek to when we're winning it as long as we do it.
An unbeaten season where you don’t win the league is obviously not going to count for much.
For all the people saying maximum points, would you genuinely rather;
A) 37 wins 1 loss for 111 points
Over
B) 36 wins 2 draws for 110 points
Principles are the same.
Unbeaten trumps 100 pts for me. Getting to 100 is great & all but there's still a black mark on the record. In City's case you also have the fact that they lost the 3 most important games in their history in a 1 week period. This also blights the season. Much like if Leicester had gone down the season after winning the PL, City & that week are inextricably linked.
In Arsenals case the drew a few on their way to the record but this rarely comes up when it's talked about. They are the Invincibles.
In Arsenals case the drew a few on their way to the record but this rarely comes up when it's talked about. They are the Invincibles.
The real question in this poll is probably “how much does going a whole season unbeaten-and winning the league- matter to you”
I don’t know if it’s bragging rights or just downright immature but being able to say that no one could beat you and holding the trophy a loft at the end of season is pretty amazing. The objective is to win the title, obviously the more points you win the higher the likelihood of that but overall it’s being first place that counts, and I’d rather do that and be able to say to the 19 other clubs “None of you could beat us”
If a team were to go 37-1, you can just imagine the amount of stick the team that beat them would be handing out.
I don’t know if it’s bragging rights or just downright immature but being able to say that no one could beat you and holding the trophy a loft at the end of season is pretty amazing. The objective is to win the title, obviously the more points you win the higher the likelihood of that but overall it’s being first place that counts, and I’d rather do that and be able to say to the 19 other clubs “None of you could beat us”
If a team were to go 37-1, you can just imagine the amount of stick the team that beat them would be handing out.
I'd always take more points than occasional loss. Bouncing back from a loss is what makes champions and a loss here and there is better to me than drawing 4 games against Huddersfield and the likes.
@Carolina Red thanks for the poll xx
Again, from a purely rational point of view, you'd have to choose the 111 points. I already said I'd choose the invincible season because all the stuff around it but it is clear from a pragmatic point of view.
You can say that everybody has to decide for himself when the "soft factors" outweigh the "pragmatic" ones. Some may say, they gladly trade the one point in your scenario for the invincibles title while Peyroteo in this case argues completely rational and says it would be unimportant. For others, the line would be at 10, 20 or whatever points while you say points don't matter as long as you win the league. It is personal preference and ultimately the question how much importance you pay to the "bragging rights" as you explained in your second post.
Also, the line between "invincible" and "boring" is very thin. There is a reason why the three points for victory were introduced. As a fan, it is much more exciting if teams go for the win. I very much prefer a manager who takes the risk and tries to win the match instead of being happy with a draw. It is more entertaining and after all, the end product is greater. If you want to have an invincible season, this would be the wrong approach.
So, I stick with it: From a pragmatic point, more points equals the better result. But for the story telling, legend, banter etc. I'd choose the invincible season.
Exactly, losing a game means nothing - it really says nothing about ultimate ability. A team can basically win 37 games and lose one on the last day by fielding their reserves, or getting a wrongful red card in the first minute, changing a game completely away to the second best team in the league. What Man City have done this year, as well as Chelsea under Mourinho, is way more impressive than what Arsenal did with their invincible team. Arsenal drew Portsmouth twice, Charlton, Fulham, Leicester, Bolton, Everton, Newcastle and Birmingham among others in the league that year, totaling 12 draws. That's 26 wins, City have 30 and counting, they will at the very least end up with 31 wins out of 38 games, which beats Arsenal easily. City will beat Arsenal by 10 points, that's all that matters.
Invincible/unbeatable trumps getting beat 3-2 off your biggest rival when you were 2nil up at half time and thinking you were about to win the league.
Saying you prefer B is the same as saying you prefer 2 draws over 1 win and 1 loss which just goes completely against how the sport works.
The reason people rate being undefeated so highly is because of the media that built it up to be something really special when it really isn't. It's a footnote of an achievement, just like winning the league with over 100 goals or winning the league by conceding 15 goals like Chelsea did in 2005.
It's impressive and a rare thing to happen but people give it way too much importance.